Yep. In fact the original concept of NIL (or should I say rationalization) was that athletes should be able to get paid for their name/image/likeness to promote a product or service, not specifically to play a sport. It appears that for the most part it has devolved into just paying athletes to improve the boosters college basketball and football team.
More potential NCAA changes
- Thread starter Carlsbad7
- Start date
True, but before colleges and NCAA were making money off of players Name, Image, and likeness which is illegal.
Highlander
SILVER ELITE
I just don't see this setup being sustainable for long for most universities. Personally I'm conflicted - I love our college culture where athletics plays a part, that said, I hate what it has become with big $$$ and NIL. More and more schools will choose to go D3 or just scrap it all together and have club sports. We need to get back to the focus on educate in this country which is really what our universities should be about.
That's a great point. Name, image and likeness for whom? Between the words "booster" and "social media", I need to go take another shower.
And on the flip side, Shedeur Sanders isn't making a dime unless he wears a Colorado Buffaloes jersey. Nobody knows Olivia Dunne exists unless she's a gymnast for LSU.
There has to be a common ground, that produces an equitable outcome, that doesn't destroy the game. Again, I don't see this lasting long or ending well in its current form.
This kid is going to be a junior and has completed 44 college passes. He has already committed to or played for the following schools primarily driven by NIL.
Miami
Florida (suing for a claimed $13.5 mm NIL contract)
ASU
Georgia
Now in transfer portal
I'd argue that Olivia Dunne is a different situation. The fact that she is on the LSU gymnastics teams is ancillary to her NIL value. I believe she was a backup at one point and still was getting paid millions. She's really getting paid as an influencer and not for her ability on the balance beam. While I don't completely understand the influencer thing (dating myself) I'm OK with it because she's providing a service to the products she is representing.
100%. England has that set up. You go to Big U to learn a trade or become a doctor. They do have soccer but it's more of a club and more for fun
Okay but she's not 'an influencer' without being a gymnast at LSU. That's my point. She has no NIL value without LSU. It's like the Kardashian family. Every one of those women should be paying a % of that NIL money to Ray J for putting Kim on film. Sort of a finder's fee, you know?
Without CU, Shedeur is just another athletic son of a HOF football player. Had the kid stayed at Jackson State, nobody knows him.
That is a good point. So what happens when these kids get a big NIL "salary" from boosters and they don't perform? Will the boosters then withhold money until they quit and leave? Seems like the boosters now have direct control of the purse strings and have defacto control over who comes to and leaves the program through NIL dollars. Or if players feeling they are underpaid could pull a Jayden Daniels, let ASU develop them then run to LSU to get paid. This is a whole new world and will take some adjustment.
It sure beats the $100 handshakes the players had to do in the past with Mr. Rich Booster. These guys love to control people. I had a buddy tell me that his buddy from a Big U would go shake hands with the booster bros for spending money and just some food money. The players were slaves.
She was a big influencer prior to attending LSU, but yes going to LSU enhanced her profile. Arguably though, she is more influential than LSU gymnastics. Whereas in football, the college program is bigger than the athlete. Arch Manning is big, but without the NCAA FBS football platform and the UT program, his influence is limited.
To be clear, you support, for the sake of nostalgia, the redistribution of wealth to support non-earning sports in college? Where the top earners, in this case football and men's basketball, effectively pay for the remaining 23-48 sports?
Agreed. But its mutated to "student athletes" being to paid to attend a school solely to play a sport as opposed to to being paid for NIL. Maybe some see this as I subtle, or semantic difference, but I do not.
My concern is were running into a situation where college athletics become effectively disassociated from the actual college and becomes an NCAA pro league. The recent ruling on JC eligibility compounds my concern. I'm I being too idealistic of how college athletics should be? Maybe so.
The top earners are football and basketball but not necessarily the players themselves. My point is that people watch Duke basketball and Alabama football. The players obviously make that what it is, in the moment, but who do you credit? Mike Krzyzewski or Jason Tatum? Nick Saban or Tua Tagovailoa? To say that the NCAA is some evil entity, that's been screwing athletes for years, doesn't work for me. My company makes a ton of money and I see a fraction of it. Does that mean my company is evil? I think athletes have always received a certain amount of perks like scholarships, wink and nod acceptance into the school they may not have qualified for otherwise, preferential scheduling and class placement, wink and nod with professors, meal cards, etc. Stuff we all know about and, depending on your sport and school, some blank envelopes. I get that it's not all pure, and part of it is me being nostalgic, but I don't think this was broken. I don't think it needed fixing by making the transfer portal as wide open as it is and NIL being the reason a QB is on his fourth school in four years. I think that's sad and I think it's going to backfire on everyone participating in, and watching, college sports. I think they possibly could have done something to give athletes a better quality of life while in school, but if being a college athlete is such a horrible struggle, don't be a college athlete.
To answer your first question, I'm not sure how I feel about the 'redistribution' because schools offer the opportunity for those football and basketball players to make money in the first place. Should it ALL go to Shedeur Sanders instead of a % to the woman's soccer team? I think that's a bigger discussion and I can see the argument for both sides.
I'll have to look her up. I had no idea there was an Olivia Dunne before LSU. All I see is an average looking college girl doing cartwheels on the beach in tight sweats.
I stand by my statement that social media will destroy this country before anything else does.
But to be clear, if there wasn't a redistribution of wealth (and in the case for women, title IX), most colleges would only keep football and men's basketball. Do you agree with that premise? So in effect, we have to have some form of collectivism for college sports to exist beyond the top two earning sports, right? We have to spread the wealth, if you will.
Theoretically the money that the NCAA makes goes back to the member schools. The NCAA is a well organized entity and provides a very valuable and extensive service for college athletes. The CEO makes $3m a year which seems low for a billion dollar organization. The NCAA is not perfect and arguably greedy. However, compared to US Soccer, FIFA, the IOC and many other sports organization entities, the NCAA seems like a saint.
Personally I think that some schools will drop football and make other sports their focus.
Sure. But what was so wrong with what we had 5 years ago? Was it not working? If a 320-lb lineman at Alabama is going to bed hungry because his meal pass doesn't cut it, fine. Add 10 meals a week to the plan. Hell, give an athlete 2 free round trip flights home to see his/her mama every year. Whatever. When my daughter was looking at Santa Barbara for soccer, we heard that 'Paul is a great guy and obviously UCSB is a strong school with a great location, but he tends to carry too many players and that means less sugar for the players that don't start every match'. How do you travel? Does everyone get to travel? So that became a factor in the decision. That said, what a trade off. Do you want to stay in a Holiday Inn Express in Fresno or watch online (from your dorm) overlooking some of California's best coastal views?
I don't know how all those programs do their thing but I don't think a few tweaks would have been worse than essentially undoing the system. This bit about transferring because someone promised you NIL money (that didn't come) or you didn't play as much as you wanted, seems ridiculous. When you start seeing athletes at 3 or 4 different schools... I'd say it's not helping the cause.
Are you talking about schools that are known for other sports (like a Duke)?